Any game that feels like work is a game that fails in my books. So Far Cry 2 with your distant travelling, no shortcuts and no allies (that are worth their salt), fails.
Settlers Rise Of An Empire was something i was looking forward too, but seems to have fallen on its feets by lack of any game customisation. Such as selecting how many enemies for example, RTS rule one.
From time to time, your character would randomly fall down when you changed direction. There is nothing you can do to avoid it or change the frequency in which it happens.
Holy shit what? Why in the blue jesus sky hell would they EVER build in something so retarded? As a frequent Melee player who once considered buying a Wii just for Brawl... wow.
You know, ive been playing Brawl for several days now (flatmate got it in the house) and i've never even noticed this...and we're all convinced that brawl is ten times better than melee.
From time to time, your character would randomly fall down when you changed direction. There is nothing you can do to avoid it or change the frequency in which it happens.
Holy shit what? Why in the blue jesus sky hell would they EVER build in something so retarded? As a frequent Melee player who once considered buying a Wii just for Brawl... wow.
You know, ive been playing Brawl for several days now (flatmate got it in the house) and i've never even noticed this...and we're all convinced that brawl is ten times better than melee.
It happens more often when you are dashing back and forth and is noticeable to me. Probably happens once ever couple matches. I'm not a competitive brawl player so it doesn't effect me and I just don't care about the "feature". I'll agree that it is completely pointless and unnecessary.
From time to time, your character would randomly fall down when you changed direction. There is nothing you can do to avoid it or change the frequency in which it happens.
Holy shit what? Why in the blue jesus sky hell would they EVER build in something so retarded? As a frequent Melee player who once considered buying a Wii just for Brawl... wow.
You know, ive been playing Brawl for several days now (flatmate got it in the house) and i've never even noticed this...and we're all convinced that brawl is ten times better than melee.
Are you playing it "Competitively?"
Because to me, when Brawl is played in a random stage, with all items, and with four friends, it's really fun and probably better than Melee. Though my friends who play it competitively (Meaning one on one, no items, etc) bitch to no ends about it.
Not saying one way is the right way of playing the game, just that playing the game a certain way will probably change your enjoyment out of it.
Kyougu on
0
DomhnallMinty D. Vision!ScotlandRegistered Userregular
From time to time, your character would randomly fall down when you changed direction. There is nothing you can do to avoid it or change the frequency in which it happens.
Holy shit what? Why in the blue jesus sky hell would they EVER build in something so retarded? As a frequent Melee player who once considered buying a Wii just for Brawl... wow.
You know, ive been playing Brawl for several days now (flatmate got it in the house) and i've never even noticed this...and we're all convinced that brawl is ten times better than melee.
I prefer Brawl to Melee and I loved Melee. I think tripping only happened if you changed direction quickly and requently.
edit:
Me and my friends play the game 'competitively' 99% of the time.
Domhnall on
Xbox Live - Minty D Vision Steam - Minty D. Vision! Origin/BF3 - MintyDVision
I'll jump on that GTAIV disappointment bandwagon. The whole game just took itself too seriously. Then you have this big city to tool around in, but nothing really fun to do in it. Your wanted level will, at worst, end up bringing a helicopter after you. Where is the Army? The tanks? The vehicle physics were "realistic" (i.e., boring), the weapons selection was lackluster and tame (I want my minigun!), the ammo limits were stupid, property "ownership" was practically useless, and so on and so forth. What's the point of playing through a game where you start out as a nobody foreigner with almost nothing when you end the game the same way? Vice City had some excellent features, but yet Rockstar somehow keeps leaving them out. It doesn't make any sense to make each iteration "different" instead of better.
And the cell phone. The cell phone.
If you seriously can't understand how anyone would want to work the story of a guy who had everything (or at least a lot) and lost it all into a videogame, then again, may I point you in the direction of Saint's Row 2? I hear it has sewage trucks.
Seriously, though, I am curious about one thing. Why didn't people like the cell phone? Not saying there can't be anything to dislike, just I haven't heard it brought up that much as a black mark against GTA IV.
The phone got maddening for me after a while. Here is why!
Mostly, it was because Rockstar seemed intent on keeping that thing on and bothering you for as long as possible. Sleep mode was there, but doing something simple like, for example, pausing and going to the map would snap it right back on again. Getting to know your friends was fun for me, but after a while I'd exhausted most of their conversations - yet they still wouldn't leave me alone, and denying them would lower our rating. GTAIV's gameplay options were limited, but it was still way more fun to go joyriding than to go bowling. I didn't like how the phone kept enforcing the latter on you.
Also, yes, the storyline was good, though rushed and underdeveloped in a few vital parts, but man don't knock on people who prefer fun gameplay instead. Just because Saint's Row 2 has more and occasionally less mature activities doesn't make it a game for drooling troglodytes.
From time to time, your character would randomly fall down when you changed direction. There is nothing you can do to avoid it or change the frequency in which it happens.
Holy shit what? Why in the blue jesus sky hell would they EVER build in something so retarded? As a frequent Melee player who once considered buying a Wii just for Brawl... wow.
You know, ive been playing Brawl for several days now (flatmate got it in the house) and i've never even noticed this...and we're all convinced that brawl is ten times better than melee.
Are you playing it "Competitively?"
Because to me, when Brawl is played in a random stage, with all items, and with four friends, it's really fun and probably better than Melee. Though my friends who play it competitively (Meaning one on one, no items, etc) bitch to no ends about it.
Not saying one way is the right way of playing the game, just that playing the game a certain way will probably change your enjoyment out of it.
I was a little harsh in my statement, perhaps. I do like brawl a lot, i just enjoy melee more.
Sounds interesting. Also, sorry about the ninja-edit.
Even with graphs, I'm not buying that Halo: CE had more auto-aim than the other two. In Halo 2, you could actually just whip your aim past a guy's head, fire the rifle, and it would magically hit him square in the face. Whether or not you were actually pointing the rifle at the guy's head when you fired was irrelevant. That's some serious auto-aim. Halo CE required that you at least have the reticle on a target before correcting anything.
I think a lot of these disappointments come from too much info from the developers, too early. Some things always get cut in a game, and developers often try to hype their game. If someone reads and sees all these videos and early impressions and jumps on the hype train you get unrealistic expectations. A lot of the games mentioned here are good games - but not fantastic games.
I've learned my lesson and rarely follow a game closely, but try and remain indifferent until it is released and then see what impressions people have. It doesn't always work, though. I wish I didn't have those high expectations for Warhammer.
Resistance 1. The guns sound like peashooters. I'll probably get Resistance 2 next week since I want a new shooter, but the guns still sound the same it seems. Hopefully the DualShock 3 will make it a bit more tolerable.
MGS4, although I liked it a lot. The controls (minus a few things like leaning against a wall) were tight, the graphics were superb, but the "making an alliance" with the local militia was so overhyped. Just shoot the PMCs. There's really no reason not to. The levels weren't as good as MGS3. The cut scenes weren't as good -
too much Japanese humor, lovey-dovey stuff with Meryl and Johnny at the end, Johnny getting the squirts was unneeded comic relief that was merely disgusting and ruined the well-established, serious tone... the "Let's not shoot Liquid" at all of those cut scenes drove me NUTS, whether it was Snake or the Marines. Raiden getting a limb or two every time he gets in a fight and putting a sword in his mouth.
The fist fight at the end of the game was epic though.
MGS3 did a good job with Snake/Eva's cut scenes, I loved the CQC scenes at the beginning of the game, and MGS4 just didn't have that kind of appeal.
I still loved the game, but it could've been so much better, and although I'm a pretty die-hard MGS fan, it did not deserve all of those 10's. The levels were just not enough fun. Although I do have to say the game ended way better than I could've ever imagined, I absolutely loved it. The online was also so subpar.
Also.. Brawl. Why is there no MegaMan? R.O.B. and other obscure characters? Isaac from Golden Sun would've been great. Why is Link so much weaker? He wasn't overpowered in Melee. Some of the character nerfing just seemed unnecessary. I like some of the new changes like reverting to the N64's gravity settings, and the game is great for tons of people, but I don't like the 1 on 1 fights as much as Melee or N64.
There are tons of other games... I just won't go into them yet.
I haven't been too disappointed with much this year. I didn't play Soul Calibur IV nearly as much as I thought I would, but the game wasn't bad or anything. I just played the first 2 so much and with the mostly stagnant nature of fighting games, it was too similar to what I had been playing for years to really keep me playing.
I also played LBP for the first time yesterday and I had been planning on buying it soon. I hate the three planes of movement to a degree that makes me wonder if I even want to play the game at all and the controls aren't nearly as tight as they should be. It changed to a "find cheap or goozex" type of purchase for me.
EDIT: Oh and if we want to extend this beyond this year: My most disappointing game of all time is Chrono Cross.
cuz they had to compensate for toon link being so awesome ;-)
Guek on
0
KorKnown to detonate from time to timeRegistered Userregular
edited November 2008
To clarify some on the Brawl tripping issue. While you trip (which I think was found to be a .3% chance when you smash in any direction) you gain invincibility frames, and when you recover from said trip, you can roll in any direction, gaining a few more invincibility frames.
The clusterfuck that has been LBP's online and user generated component has been disappointing. Moreso because the game itself is so great. The control quirks really aren't something that can't be mastered with a small amount of time.
The clusterfuck that has been LBP's online and user generated component has been disappointing. .
Are you referring to the very strict moderation of the user-submitted levels, and about how so many levels that seem to be taken down for slight and seemingly absurd reasons?
Or that the online component/ user component has been disappointing in general?
Because a lot of big time map submitters are pretty annoyed about what they feel is pretty harsh and often arbitrary removal of many of their levels.
After playing Saints Row 2, I find GTA 4 to be a bit disappointing only in the strange mix of tones. It had this nice, serious, deep story line, but bracketing it were the horrible music DJs and commercials for Pißwasser and super-right-wing talk show hosts that threw all that immersion out of the window. I'm not claiming that the GTA series should be "Serious Business" all the time, but there was no sort of gobetween between outlandish parody of the random civilians and stereo, and the immersible, somber main plot.
I can't speak for Halo 3, but from this guy's studies it seems like Halo:CE has more auto-tracking for moving shooters against stationary targets while Halo 2 has more auto-tracking for stationary shooters when a moving target crosses their aim. Neither of these really address my beef with Halo 2 autoaim: the tendency of bullets to connect even though the reticle is far off-center of actually hitting.
Interesting information, though, I didn't realize that reticle "friction" physically rotated your character.
kedinik on
I made a game! Hotline Maui. Requires mouse and keyboard.
I'll jump on that GTAIV disappointment bandwagon. The whole game just took itself too seriously. Then you have this big city to tool around in, but nothing really fun to do in it. Your wanted level will, at worst, end up bringing a helicopter after you. Where is the Army? The tanks? The vehicle physics were "realistic" (i.e., boring), the weapons selection was lackluster and tame (I want my minigun!), the ammo limits were stupid, property "ownership" was practically useless, and so on and so forth. What's the point of playing through a game where you start out as a nobody foreigner with almost nothing when you end the game the same way? Vice City had some excellent features, but yet Rockstar somehow keeps leaving them out. It doesn't make any sense to make each iteration "different" instead of better.
And the cell phone. The cell phone.
If you seriously can't understand how anyone would want to work the story of a guy who had everything (or at least a lot) and lost it all into a videogame, then again, may I point you in the direction of Saint's Row 2? I hear it has sewage trucks.
Seriously, though, I am curious about one thing. Why didn't people like the cell phone? Not saying there can't be anything to dislike, just I haven't heard it brought up that much as a black mark against GTA IV.
The phone got maddening for me after a while. Here is why!
Mostly, it was because Rockstar seemed intent on keeping that thing on and bothering you for as long as possible. Sleep mode was there, but doing something simple like, for example, pausing and going to the map would snap it right back on again. Getting to know your friends was fun for me, but after a while I'd exhausted most of their conversations - yet they still wouldn't leave me alone, and denying them would lower our rating. GTAIV's gameplay options were limited, but it was still way more fun to go joyriding than to go bowling. I didn't like how the phone kept enforcing the latter on you.
Also, yes, the storyline was good, though rushed and underdeveloped in a few vital parts, but man don't knock on people who prefer fun gameplay instead. Just because Saint's Row 2 has more and occasionally less mature activities doesn't make it a game for drooling troglodytes.
Also, one of the reasons I, and various people, hated the phone was that when you brought it up, you couldn't run. And if you got shot, hit, or anything like that, it just goes away. So if you were getting shot at by the cops, and you wanted to call, say, the Lawyer chick, to get the wanted level removed, one stray bullet, no matter what, meant you were -fucked-. Because, if I recall, calling her for the same thing in a short period of time insta-failed it and unless the call was finished, you didn't get the wanted level taken away. And then you died, usually. And lost a ton of money.
That's one of the things that GTAIV annoyed me greatly about, but I still enjoyed it a lot, really.
Also, this is going back a ways, but Majora's Mask?
i dont get disapointed by big name franchise games much anymore, because theres really so many means to check into what i can expect that i can pinpoint what id like and what i wouldnt pretty accurately these days.
reviews, metareviews, userreviews...
take spore for instance, of course i got curious with all the hype, theres many ways to find out this game is absolutely not what i would have enjoyed, all of it being confirmed by various people i know who played the game.
a pretty solid way i find checking out userreviews, i usually pick the one with the lowest score period and go from there. you could argue that thats not very subjective but really its been working great for me so far, you just need to read between the lines a bit.
carmofin on
PSN | Steam
___
NNID: carmofin
3DS: 2852 6971 9745
Throw me a PM if you add me
0
SirUltimosDon't talk, Rusty. Just paint.Registered Userregular
I haven't seen anyone mention Soul Calibur IV. I have absolutely no interest in customizing my character, just in fighting. Online multi was extremely disappointing and for me, near unplayable most of the time. I was so impressed with the way VF5 handled online play that I had such high hopes for the game.
I'm not sure if you can categorize Castle Crashers as high profile, but that was not as good as I expected. Looked great, lots of neat features, liked the art... but the game was kind of boring after a while. I would consider it a step down from the old AD&D beat'em ups by Capcom, or even Guardian Heroes.
When I first got Soul Calibur 4 I was incredibly dissapointed with it. First becasue there was no single player mode like in SC2 (Tower of Lost Souls just isn't as good) and because there were a lot fewer multiplayer modes. I remember having a ton of fun playing team matches, where each person chose a few characters and would fight until one person ran out or characters. And c'mon, imagine tag team like you can do in the single player? Against another human that would be awesome!
I've come to appreciate it a lot more now, though. I've certainly invested enough time into it.
I'm probably going to get eaten alive for this, but a lot of people were talking about how bethesda fixed all the dialogue problems and the story was OMFG amazing in fallout 3, so I picked it up despite being throughly disenchanted by oblivion. Yeah, I hate to be that guy, but it really is kinda a hack and slash game with guns.
I was especially disappointed in how people talked about all the non-combat quest resoltions available, and sure, you can resolve a lot of quests by ways other than shooting stuff, but combat is still 90% of the game, and unavoidable. You can't run away (to the orange grid) from enemies that will shoot you in the back, and you have to go through enemies everywhere to travel anywhere on the map that you haven't been to before. Not to mention the freaking talon company ambusing you a fraction of the time when you fast travel.
Also, the gore is way over done, even without bloody mess, people's limbs fall off under a light breeze. Actually seeing it, rather than reading a text discription, makes it just mastrubatory rather than ammusing. And I didn't notice a slider to tone it down like in the original games
I'll also add to fable 2 onto this list, though i did expect to be disappointed. I also didn't really play it myself, but I did watch my roommate play through the majority of it. In typical molyneux fashion, he promised the world and instead we got something that felt predictable, uninspired, and stilted. The game had all the right pieces, it seemed, but there was a severe absence of charm to be found anywhere in the game. The story was bland and freedom of choice ultimately resulted in a lot of meaningless options. The camera was also god fuckin awful in tight places.
But like I said, that's more or less what I expected from a molyneux game, which is why my friend shelled out money for it and I just sat there and watched :P
I kept watching because the game was getting a good amount of praise/hype on the inter-tubes.
Sounds interesting. Also, sorry about the ninja-edit.
Even with graphs, I'm not buying that Halo: CE had more auto-aim than the other two. In Halo 2, you could actually just whip your aim past a guy's head, fire the rifle, and it would magically hit him square in the face. Whether or not you were actually pointing the rifle at the guy's head when you fired was irrelevant. That's some serious auto-aim. Halo CE required that you at least have the reticle on a target before correcting anything.
Watching that video there makes me come to one conclusion. Halo: CE was LOVED by three of my friends who would dominate if they played together. Once Halo 2 came out, they hated it. I wonder why.
Sounds interesting. Also, sorry about the ninja-edit.
Even with graphs, I'm not buying that Halo: CE had more auto-aim than the other two. In Halo 2, you could actually just whip your aim past a guy's head, fire the rifle, and it would magically hit him square in the face. Whether or not you were actually pointing the rifle at the guy's head when you fired was irrelevant. That's some serious auto-aim. Halo CE required that you at least have the reticle on a target before correcting anything.
Watching that video there makes me come to one conclusion. Halo: CE was LOVED by three of my friends who would dominate if they played together. Once Halo 2 came out, they hated it. I wonder why.
Probably because the weapon balance was completely screwed. People bitch about the Halo: CE pistol, but it let you be able to fight against pretty much anything. Just because somebody had a rifle, rifle + plasma pistol, sniper rifle, or rocket launcher didn't mean you were basically going to lose at anything past 20 feet. Considering that Halo 2 had SMG starts for a loooong time, most fights became about who got the best weapons first, not who could fight the best. When everyone started with a pistol in Halo: CE, you had a fighting chance against everything. Plus, the physics in Halo: CE were simply more fun. Bungie went the boring route for Halo 2 and used the Havoc engine, so no more amusing stories about Warthogs and explosions. There are a lot of reasons why Halo 2 was a disappointment and not just because Bungie caved to people whining about getting trashed by better players.
Love Halo 3, though, even if sticks to the less amusing, more realistic physics engine. At least the weapon balance is decent this time around and there's an actual ending.
I would also like to go on record as saying I absolutely hated RE4. I played REmake right before picking up RE4, so instead of a puzzle game with zombie elements I got treated to an action game with terrible controls and arguably even worse voice acting. Oh, and a story whose mother drank heavily while pregnant. And not-zombies. And shitty escort sections. If I hadn't payed for the thing, I never would have played through the entire campaign. My disappointment in the game was palpable.
My two biggest dissapointments of the year would be Spore and Warhammer Online.
Spore defied logic and simple mathematics and showed me that if you put together 5 fifths of a game you don't actually get a game. You just end up with 5 limited, cut down parts of games. Well, actually 1 of the parts worked out ok, the cell stage, but that's mainly because it was never going to be much of anything in the first place. The editors lived up to their potential but I didn't see much point spending that much time painstakingly editing things for a game that isn't really much fun.
Warhammer Online had some great things going for it. World RvR, Keep Sieges, Public Quests and a bunch of other great features. Unfortunately all of the game's great features are wholly reliant on other players being there to make them work. And while I was playing (which was in the weeks after launch, where one would expect there to be shitloads of people everywhere) the good bits of the game didn't happen nearly enough. So instead you're left with solo-questing for the majority of the time and the pve content in Warhammer isn't anywhere near as fun as the RvR. In fact it was shitty and boring.
Of course the alternate problem with warhammer was when it swung too far the other way and you get a really awesome massive RvR battle if it got too big then the game couldn't handle it and it became unplayable due to lag. It requires far too many variables to be just right for the game to work properly.
I haven't seen anyone mention Soul Calibur IV. I have absolutely no interest in customizing my character, just in fighting. Online multi was extremely disappointing and for me, near unplayable most of the time. I was so impressed with the way VF5 handled online play that I had such high hopes for the game.
I'm not sure if you can categorize Castle Crashers as high profile, but that was not as good as I expected. Looked great, lots of neat features, liked the art... but the game was kind of boring after a while. I would consider it a step down from the old AD&D beat'em ups by Capcom, or even Guardian Heroes.
When I first got Soul Calibur 4 I was incredibly dissapointed with it. First becasue there was no single player mode like in SC2 (Tower of Lost Souls just isn't as good) and because there were a lot fewer multiplayer modes. I remember having a ton of fun playing team matches, where each person chose a few characters and would fight until one person ran out or characters. And c'mon, imagine tag team like you can do in the single player? Against another human that would be awesome!
I've come to appreciate it a lot more now, though. I've certainly invested enough time into it.
Man, what? SCIV is all about the fighting. They took everything else out. And it's really good. I'd put it up there with SC2. The online has better options than VF5 (though not as good as DOA4), and is perfectly passable if you only play 5 bars.
My two biggest dissapointments of the year would be Spore and Warhammer Online.
Spore defied logic and simple mathematics and showed me that if you put together 5 fifths of a game you don't actually get a game. You just end up with 5 limited, cut down parts of games. Well, actually 1 of the parts worked out ok, the cell stage, but that's mainly because it was never going to be much of anything in the first place. The editors lived up to their potential but I didn't see much point spending that much time painstakingly editing things for a game that isn't really much fun.
Yup. Spore was a big load of "THIS IS AWESOME BUT. . . .wow everything else sucks. I guess i'll go back to cell stage. . "
Age of Conan was a pretty big let down for me but I sold that stupid War Mammoth and got my money back.
Master of Orion 3 and Warlords 4 on the same day. Checkmate.
Wow...you might as well have had a prostate exam and gotten a papercut between your fingers while you were at it.
Assassin's Creed I found very disappointing. As far as I could tell it was the "climb something tall, pose dramatically, jump off it" game, and that wasn't what I was looking for. Beautiful, great attention to detail, yes, but the gameplay just wasn't there.
Also, I'm rather perturbed to see all this disappointment at Brawl, because my wife and I are strongly considering buying a Wii and that would be our first game purchase. It seems most people are down on it because they knew too much about it going in, and I know nothing about the game at all, so hopefully that will help.
^^ Brawl is fine and is almost certainly a better game than Melee, but it got ungodly amounts of hype for what amounts to your standard fighting game upgrade.
Spore and Wii Music are both cases where their designers had great, ambitious ideas and absolutely no idea how to transfer them into interesting interactive entertainment. Spore fails mostly because it's just got five simple (and supremely boring) game parts standing in for what could have been a much more naturally paced experience. Wii Music fails because it's too regimented to be meaningful for experimentation, but too loose to be interesting as a music game, so it exists in this kind of uncomfortable place where it's exactly too far away from any possible goal to have a purpose.
Silent Hill Homecoming, meanwhile, might just be the least ambitious game I've played this year. Take Silent Hill 2, slap some shaders on it, add a dodge button, switch up the names and call it a day. There's staying faithful to a series and then there's just spinning your wheels, and Homecoming is definitely guilty of the latter. It has no scares worth mentioning, no original or interesting characters, a completely out of place sexual overtone to the visuals that exists entirely because "that's what Silent Hill games have," and an aesthetic that mistakes eerie for dreary and gritty for monochromatic.
It's like a poorly maintained haunted house ride, really. No matter how hard it might try to spook you, you can still see the paint peeling away, the glowing exit signs, the stings holding up the bats and the cheap materials used to build the thing. The sights and sounds of Silent Hill are familiar, but none of it is effective because it's all so perfunctory. The Playstation game tried to recreate a small town, and Homecoming tries to recreate a Playstation game.
Until people learn to ignore most hype, publicity, and so forth, almost all "big-name" titles are going to be disappointing. We only get an RE4-level title every few years, you know.
You might as well say all blockbusters are worth seeing.
GTAIV single player was fine, but the multi was a let-down, not that I played much of it. Crackdown was way better.
Also DMC4 was pretty uninteresting to play. And as has been mentioned, Soul Calibur IV wasn't anywhere near as much fun as I was hoping.
Basically, IMHO this year, fourth iterations of established franchises have been good but not earth-shattering.
How was GTA4 MP a let-down? I think it's really fun, I just wish more of my RL friends would convert from PC to console to join me in a few games.
It just didn't feel very solid to me. Initially I basically wanted GTA Vice City co-op. Which is a far cry from how the team games worked out. Running around the environment quickly became quite dull, and the controls were a bit too fiddly. There wasn't enough to do, it felt a bit lifeless.
This was after playing Crackdown though, which was all "WOOOAH LETS DRIVE A TRUCK UP A SKYSCRAPER AND LEAP OFF BRIDGES THROWING DUMPSTERS AT EACH OTHER AND KICKING SPORTSCARS THROUGH THE AIR WOOO BABY!" so maybe my expectations were distorted by that.
Crackdown was certainly more fun, for me at least.
Resistance 1. The guns sound like peashooters. I'll probably get Resistance 2 next week since I want a new shooter, but the guns still sound the same it seems. Hopefully the DualShock 3 will make it a bit more tolerable.
I always have to say something about this when I see it. As someone who listens to the Insomniac podcast, I remember hearing them talk about how in R1 they tried to make the guns sound 'real'. People thought they felt weak. because we have gotten so used to unrealistic sounds in games and movies. So in R2 they made them 'hyper real'. Took the real sound and went over the top. Seems to have worked.
I just find it facinating how media has giving us unrealistic expectations about things
Monkeydrye on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
0
KorKnown to detonate from time to timeRegistered Userregular
edited November 2008
I remember the first time I went to the firing range in the military to qualify for my M-16.
Yeah... it basically sounded like "tap, tap, tap" more than it did "Bang, bang, bang"
GoodKingJayIIIThey wanna get mygold on the ceilingRegistered Userregular
edited November 2008
After playing a game like Fallout 3, or hell GTA4, I realized just how shallow Assassin's Creed really is. I haven't finished that game, and I don't think I can bear to do so. So repetitive...
Supreme Commander did not turn out as awesome as I expected. A good game in its own right, but I was really hoping to see something that rivaled Starcraft, a game made over a decade ago. It did not.
Assassin's Creed for the having a beautiful world and nice mechanics but nothing to fucking do.
Resident Evil 4, while I do like it, is the most over-praised game ever. It's all just run to a corner, shoot zombie, he recoils, run in and kick them, maybe follow with a knife, repeat for hours until game ends.
Lumines. I just don't get it. It's a pretty standard puzzle game and I hate that you have to start over every time you play. I never got past about stage 7 or so and I got tired of the same damn songs. There needed to be an option to randomize the stages.
Posts
Settlers Rise Of An Empire was something i was looking forward too, but seems to have fallen on its feets by lack of any game customisation. Such as selecting how many enemies for example, RTS rule one.
You know, ive been playing Brawl for several days now (flatmate got it in the house) and i've never even noticed this...and we're all convinced that brawl is ten times better than melee.
It happens more often when you are dashing back and forth and is noticeable to me. Probably happens once ever couple matches. I'm not a competitive brawl player so it doesn't effect me and I just don't care about the "feature". I'll agree that it is completely pointless and unnecessary.
Are you playing it "Competitively?"
Because to me, when Brawl is played in a random stage, with all items, and with four friends, it's really fun and probably better than Melee. Though my friends who play it competitively (Meaning one on one, no items, etc) bitch to no ends about it.
Not saying one way is the right way of playing the game, just that playing the game a certain way will probably change your enjoyment out of it.
I prefer Brawl to Melee and I loved Melee. I think tripping only happened if you changed direction quickly and requently.
edit:
Me and my friends play the game 'competitively' 99% of the time.
Steam - Minty D. Vision!
Origin/BF3 - MintyDVision
The phone got maddening for me after a while. Here is why!
Mostly, it was because Rockstar seemed intent on keeping that thing on and bothering you for as long as possible. Sleep mode was there, but doing something simple like, for example, pausing and going to the map would snap it right back on again. Getting to know your friends was fun for me, but after a while I'd exhausted most of their conversations - yet they still wouldn't leave me alone, and denying them would lower our rating. GTAIV's gameplay options were limited, but it was still way more fun to go joyriding than to go bowling. I didn't like how the phone kept enforcing the latter on you.
Also, yes, the storyline was good, though rushed and underdeveloped in a few vital parts, but man don't knock on people who prefer fun gameplay instead. Just because Saint's Row 2 has more and occasionally less mature activities doesn't make it a game for drooling troglodytes.
I was a little harsh in my statement, perhaps. I do like brawl a lot, i just enjoy melee more.
GT: Tanky the Tank
Black: 1377 6749 7425
Found it.
http://www.mlgpro.com/forum/showthread.php?t=198153
I've learned my lesson and rarely follow a game closely, but try and remain indifferent until it is released and then see what impressions people have. It doesn't always work, though. I wish I didn't have those high expectations for Warhammer.
MGS4, although I liked it a lot. The controls (minus a few things like leaning against a wall) were tight, the graphics were superb, but the "making an alliance" with the local militia was so overhyped. Just shoot the PMCs. There's really no reason not to. The levels weren't as good as MGS3. The cut scenes weren't as good -
The fist fight at the end of the game was epic though.
MGS3 did a good job with Snake/Eva's cut scenes, I loved the CQC scenes at the beginning of the game, and MGS4 just didn't have that kind of appeal.
Also.. Brawl. Why is there no MegaMan? R.O.B. and other obscure characters? Isaac from Golden Sun would've been great. Why is Link so much weaker? He wasn't overpowered in Melee. Some of the character nerfing just seemed unnecessary. I like some of the new changes like reverting to the N64's gravity settings, and the game is great for tons of people, but I don't like the 1 on 1 fights as much as Melee or N64.
There are tons of other games... I just won't go into them yet.
I also played LBP for the first time yesterday and I had been planning on buying it soon. I hate the three planes of movement to a degree that makes me wonder if I even want to play the game at all and the controls aren't nearly as tight as they should be. It changed to a "find cheap or goozex" type of purchase for me.
EDIT: Oh and if we want to extend this beyond this year: My most disappointing game of all time is Chrono Cross.
cuz they had to compensate for toon link being so awesome ;-)
Its more an annoyance, than it is broken.
Pokemon Safari - Sneasel, Pawniard, ????
Are you referring to the very strict moderation of the user-submitted levels, and about how so many levels that seem to be taken down for slight and seemingly absurd reasons?
Or that the online component/ user component has been disappointing in general?
Because a lot of big time map submitters are pretty annoyed about what they feel is pretty harsh and often arbitrary removal of many of their levels.
Steam ID: slashx000______Twitter: @bill_at_zeboyd______ Facebook: Zeboyd Games
I can't speak for Halo 3, but from this guy's studies it seems like Halo:CE has more auto-tracking for moving shooters against stationary targets while Halo 2 has more auto-tracking for stationary shooters when a moving target crosses their aim. Neither of these really address my beef with Halo 2 autoaim: the tendency of bullets to connect even though the reticle is far off-center of actually hitting.
Interesting information, though, I didn't realize that reticle "friction" physically rotated your character.
Also, one of the reasons I, and various people, hated the phone was that when you brought it up, you couldn't run. And if you got shot, hit, or anything like that, it just goes away. So if you were getting shot at by the cops, and you wanted to call, say, the Lawyer chick, to get the wanted level removed, one stray bullet, no matter what, meant you were -fucked-. Because, if I recall, calling her for the same thing in a short period of time insta-failed it and unless the call was finished, you didn't get the wanted level taken away. And then you died, usually. And lost a ton of money.
That's one of the things that GTAIV annoyed me greatly about, but I still enjoyed it a lot, really.
Also, this is going back a ways, but Majora's Mask?
I hated it.
There, I said it.
Majora's Mask is the best game.
Steam - Minty D. Vision!
Origin/BF3 - MintyDVision
Too far
reviews, metareviews, userreviews...
take spore for instance, of course i got curious with all the hype, theres many ways to find out this game is absolutely not what i would have enjoyed, all of it being confirmed by various people i know who played the game.
a pretty solid way i find checking out userreviews, i usually pick the one with the lowest score period and go from there. you could argue that thats not very subjective but really its been working great for me so far, you just need to read between the lines a bit.
___
NNID: carmofin
3DS: 2852 6971 9745
Throw me a PM if you add me
When I first got Soul Calibur 4 I was incredibly dissapointed with it. First becasue there was no single player mode like in SC2 (Tower of Lost Souls just isn't as good) and because there were a lot fewer multiplayer modes. I remember having a ton of fun playing team matches, where each person chose a few characters and would fight until one person ran out or characters. And c'mon, imagine tag team like you can do in the single player? Against another human that would be awesome!
I've come to appreciate it a lot more now, though. I've certainly invested enough time into it.
I was especially disappointed in how people talked about all the non-combat quest resoltions available, and sure, you can resolve a lot of quests by ways other than shooting stuff, but combat is still 90% of the game, and unavoidable. You can't run away (to the orange grid) from enemies that will shoot you in the back, and you have to go through enemies everywhere to travel anywhere on the map that you haven't been to before. Not to mention the freaking talon company ambusing you a fraction of the time when you fast travel.
Also, the gore is way over done, even without bloody mess, people's limbs fall off under a light breeze. Actually seeing it, rather than reading a text discription, makes it just mastrubatory rather than ammusing. And I didn't notice a slider to tone it down like in the original games
But like I said, that's more or less what I expected from a molyneux game, which is why my friend shelled out money for it and I just sat there and watched :P
I kept watching because the game was getting a good amount of praise/hype on the inter-tubes.
Watching that video there makes me come to one conclusion. Halo: CE was LOVED by three of my friends who would dominate if they played together. Once Halo 2 came out, they hated it. I wonder why.
Tumblr | Twitter | Twitch | Pinny Arcade Lanyard
[3DS] 3394-3901-4002 | [Xbox/Steam] Redfield85
Probably because the weapon balance was completely screwed. People bitch about the Halo: CE pistol, but it let you be able to fight against pretty much anything. Just because somebody had a rifle, rifle + plasma pistol, sniper rifle, or rocket launcher didn't mean you were basically going to lose at anything past 20 feet. Considering that Halo 2 had SMG starts for a loooong time, most fights became about who got the best weapons first, not who could fight the best. When everyone started with a pistol in Halo: CE, you had a fighting chance against everything. Plus, the physics in Halo: CE were simply more fun. Bungie went the boring route for Halo 2 and used the Havoc engine, so no more amusing stories about Warthogs and explosions. There are a lot of reasons why Halo 2 was a disappointment and not just because Bungie caved to people whining about getting trashed by better players.
Love Halo 3, though, even if sticks to the less amusing, more realistic physics engine. At least the weapon balance is decent this time around and there's an actual ending.
I would also like to go on record as saying I absolutely hated RE4. I played REmake right before picking up RE4, so instead of a puzzle game with zombie elements I got treated to an action game with terrible controls and arguably even worse voice acting. Oh, and a story whose mother drank heavily while pregnant. And not-zombies. And shitty escort sections. If I hadn't payed for the thing, I never would have played through the entire campaign. My disappointment in the game was palpable.
Spore defied logic and simple mathematics and showed me that if you put together 5 fifths of a game you don't actually get a game. You just end up with 5 limited, cut down parts of games. Well, actually 1 of the parts worked out ok, the cell stage, but that's mainly because it was never going to be much of anything in the first place. The editors lived up to their potential but I didn't see much point spending that much time painstakingly editing things for a game that isn't really much fun.
Warhammer Online had some great things going for it. World RvR, Keep Sieges, Public Quests and a bunch of other great features. Unfortunately all of the game's great features are wholly reliant on other players being there to make them work. And while I was playing (which was in the weeks after launch, where one would expect there to be shitloads of people everywhere) the good bits of the game didn't happen nearly enough. So instead you're left with solo-questing for the majority of the time and the pve content in Warhammer isn't anywhere near as fun as the RvR. In fact it was shitty and boring.
Of course the alternate problem with warhammer was when it swung too far the other way and you get a really awesome massive RvR battle if it got too big then the game couldn't handle it and it became unplayable due to lag. It requires far too many variables to be just right for the game to work properly.
Man, what? SCIV is all about the fighting. They took everything else out. And it's really good. I'd put it up there with SC2. The online has better options than VF5 (though not as good as DOA4), and is perfectly passable if you only play 5 bars.
Anyone want to beta read a paranormal mystery novella? Here's your chance.
stream
Yup. Spore was a big load of "THIS IS AWESOME BUT. . . .wow everything else sucks. I guess i'll go back to cell stage. . "
Age of Conan was a pretty big let down for me but I sold that stupid War Mammoth and got my money back.
Wow...you might as well have had a prostate exam and gotten a papercut between your fingers while you were at it.
Assassin's Creed I found very disappointing. As far as I could tell it was the "climb something tall, pose dramatically, jump off it" game, and that wasn't what I was looking for. Beautiful, great attention to detail, yes, but the gameplay just wasn't there.
Also, I'm rather perturbed to see all this disappointment at Brawl, because my wife and I are strongly considering buying a Wii and that would be our first game purchase. It seems most people are down on it because they knew too much about it going in, and I know nothing about the game at all, so hopefully that will help.
IOS Game Center ID: Isotope-X
Spore and Wii Music are both cases where their designers had great, ambitious ideas and absolutely no idea how to transfer them into interesting interactive entertainment. Spore fails mostly because it's just got five simple (and supremely boring) game parts standing in for what could have been a much more naturally paced experience. Wii Music fails because it's too regimented to be meaningful for experimentation, but too loose to be interesting as a music game, so it exists in this kind of uncomfortable place where it's exactly too far away from any possible goal to have a purpose.
Silent Hill Homecoming, meanwhile, might just be the least ambitious game I've played this year. Take Silent Hill 2, slap some shaders on it, add a dodge button, switch up the names and call it a day. There's staying faithful to a series and then there's just spinning your wheels, and Homecoming is definitely guilty of the latter. It has no scares worth mentioning, no original or interesting characters, a completely out of place sexual overtone to the visuals that exists entirely because "that's what Silent Hill games have," and an aesthetic that mistakes eerie for dreary and gritty for monochromatic.
It's like a poorly maintained haunted house ride, really. No matter how hard it might try to spook you, you can still see the paint peeling away, the glowing exit signs, the stings holding up the bats and the cheap materials used to build the thing. The sights and sounds of Silent Hill are familiar, but none of it is effective because it's all so perfunctory. The Playstation game tried to recreate a small town, and Homecoming tries to recreate a Playstation game.
You might as well say all blockbusters are worth seeing.
How was GTA4 MP a let-down? I think it's really fun, I just wish more of my RL friends would convert from PC to console to join me in a few games.
It just didn't feel very solid to me. Initially I basically wanted GTA Vice City co-op. Which is a far cry from how the team games worked out. Running around the environment quickly became quite dull, and the controls were a bit too fiddly. There wasn't enough to do, it felt a bit lifeless.
This was after playing Crackdown though, which was all "WOOOAH LETS DRIVE A TRUCK UP A SKYSCRAPER AND LEAP OFF BRIDGES THROWING DUMPSTERS AT EACH OTHER AND KICKING SPORTSCARS THROUGH THE AIR WOOO BABY!" so maybe my expectations were distorted by that.
Crackdown was certainly more fun, for me at least.
I always have to say something about this when I see it. As someone who listens to the Insomniac podcast, I remember hearing them talk about how in R1 they tried to make the guns sound 'real'. People thought they felt weak. because we have gotten so used to unrealistic sounds in games and movies. So in R2 they made them 'hyper real'. Took the real sound and went over the top. Seems to have worked.
I just find it facinating how media has giving us unrealistic expectations about things
Yeah... it basically sounded like "tap, tap, tap" more than it did "Bang, bang, bang"
Pokemon Safari - Sneasel, Pawniard, ????
Supreme Commander did not turn out as awesome as I expected. A good game in its own right, but I was really hoping to see something that rivaled Starcraft, a game made over a decade ago. It did not.
PSN: Threeve703
Resident Evil 4, while I do like it, is the most over-praised game ever. It's all just run to a corner, shoot zombie, he recoils, run in and kick them, maybe follow with a knife, repeat for hours until game ends.
Lumines. I just don't get it. It's a pretty standard puzzle game and I hate that you have to start over every time you play. I never got past about stage 7 or so and I got tired of the same damn songs. There needed to be an option to randomize the stages.
http://www.nwlwrestling.com/